Russian Federation
An article describes reasons of formation on the Territory of the Former Soviet Union of independent preliminary investigation bodies in the form of investigative committees. A comparative research was carried out on the ground of investigative committees in Belarus, the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Armenia, their purposes, organization and functional features, determined by the specifics of national criminal justice systems. Additionally their similarities and differences were describes. The author defines the place of such bodies in countries’ state mechanism and the their possible development trends. Historically along with other measures of protection of the the rights and freedoms of a person exist criminal-legal regulation of social relations and crime prevention through early prevention, detection, prevention, suppression, disclosure and investigation of crimes in criminal proceedings, which includes preliminary (pretrial) investigation of crimes. The most complicated categories among them is carried out in the form of preliminary investigations by specially authorized investigative authorities. The efficiency and effectiveness of the performance of duties of these bodies depends on the scope of the powers and their legal status in the state mechanism, and, therefore, protection of the protection of human rights and civil liberties. The conclusions based on the study of the period of reasons of formation on the Territory of the Former Soviet Union of independent preliminary investigation bodies may help to improve the state penal policy and develop ways of implementation of state policies in the sphere of enforcement of the Criminal Procedure law.
post-Soviet space, comparative research, independent preliminary investigating bodies, investigative committees, Armenia, Belarus, Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic, Russian Federation.
1. Arinin A. N. Sozdanie effektivnykh organov vnutrennikh del, sudov i prokuratury kak neobkhodimost´ modernizatsii Rossii. Politicheskoe obrazovanie. 2011. № 2.
2. Berlyavskiy L. G. Konstitutsiya v sisteme gosudarstvennogo prava perekhodnogo perioda. Gosudarstvo i pravo. 2013. № 1.
3. Berlyavskiy L. G., Raschetov V. A. Obrazovanie sledstvennykh komitetov na prostranstve byvshego SSSR. Istoriya gosudarstva i prava. 2013. № 12.
4. Boykov A. D. Tret´ya vlast´ v Rossii. Ocherki o pravosudii, zakonnosti i sudebnoy reforme 1990-1996 gg. M., 1997.
5. Golovko S. Spravedlivost´ - prevyshe vsego. Belaruskaya dumka. 2012. № 8.
6. Derishev Yu. V. Ugolovnoe dosudebnoe proizvodstvo: kontseptsiya protsedurnogo i funktsional´no-pravovogo postroeniya. Omsk, 2005.
7. Dolya E. K voprosu sozdaniya Sledstvennogo komiteta. Sovetskaya yustitsiya. 1993. № 20.
8. Zor´kin V. D., Vitruk N. V. O sostoyanii konstitutsionnoy zakonnosti v Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Rossiyskaya gazeta. 1993. 11 marta.
9. Kazakhstanskaya Pravda. 1997. 7 noyab.
10. Kim Yu. UPK (Ukrainy): plyusy i minusy. Zakon i biznes. 2012. № 17.
11. Kogamov M. Ch. Predvaritel´noe rassledovanie ugolovnykh del v Respublike Kazakhstan. Almaty, 1998.
12. Serov D. O., Averchenko A. K. Vnevedomstvennyy sledstvennyy apparat Rossii: zamysly i real´nost´. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. 2005. № 10.
13. Stepankov V. G. Prokuratura - kakoy ey byt´?. Zakonnost´. 1991. № 1.
